Based on the aforementioned viewpoint, "Kokusai Supotsu Ibento niyoru Chiiki-zukudi ni kansuru Chosakenkyu," (Research Study on Regional Development through International Sports Events) was conducted in fiscal 1998 (with study results compiled into a report in March 1999). Out of the total research costs of ¥6 million, the Japan Center for Regional Development and the former Ministry of Home Affairs (currently, the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications) together provided ¥3 million, while the remaining half was financed by the 10 local governments designated to host the World Cup (¥300,000 each). In doing so, each of these local governments effectively committed itself to the results of this research study.
The ex post survey of the World Cup, which I have just completed, can be viewed as an extension of the above research study, using 25 research items identical to those listed in the study report.
The evaluation of a business can be divided into the three stages of "system", "operation", and "performance", based on the underlying ideas of the Japan Quality Award which is modeled on the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. Performance is, by rule, to be evaluated in relation to the ultimate goals and objectives of a business. In order to generate the performance results, a system must be established first and put into operation. If regional development is the ultimate purpose of hosting the World Cup, then the event's receiving much fanfare is a necessary condition of the stage of operation. In the past, however, there were many cases in which such "fanfare" was perceived as a "performance" result. Apparently, "operation" and "performance" are mixed up here. If the success of the event were the purpose of hosting the event, it might not have been wrong to regard the "fanfare" as a "performance" result. Moreover, this could have been the case, were a sport association organizing the event. But in the case of a host local government, the success of the event itself cannot and should not be the purpose of hosting an event.
Work often becomes autotelic but a bit of rational thinking would show that we should avoid such ineptitude. Once trapped in this autotelic pitfall, we would easily lose sight of the original objective amid the passing gaiety, excitement, and emotion (such as some people might have felt when they watched Masahiko Harada breaking into tears after making a record jump and assuring gold medal for team ski jumping in the 1998 Nagano Olympics), failing to carry out sufficient and objective ex post evaluation. In such a situation, there is no hoping for long-term cost performance to be examined.
Whether the hosting of an event has led to sustainable regional development should be the basis of measurement in assessing the achievements of the local government that hosted the event. The fact that an event attracted a large number of volunteers, for instance, would only provide a measurement of the operation-stage.
Thinking this way, we can conclude that a vision of, "regional development," which serves as a foundation on which to assess achievements, is an issue of the utmost importance. What's more, the biggest question in this regard is whether each concerned local community is able to draw up a clear vision for its own region. The hosting of an international sports event is merely a means or method for achieving the ultimate goal of regional development.
